Russia is only a regional power

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I agree with you completely Russia is and always will be a regional power, no need for more land, they got loads.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

russia was also the largest country on the globe in 1939 but still wanted mmore [ poland , estonia , latvia , finland , lithuania ]

it waa still the largest country in 1945 - but still wanted more [ eastern europe ]

it was STILL the largest country in 2014 - but hey it wanted more [ crimea ]

anyone see the patern ??????????????????

I kind of notice a seventy year gap in there lol...

a reply to: midicon

the ACTUAL gap = 25 years - think about this

also - i CBA googling all the various attemmpts to create marxist puppet states in various sovereign countries

although - MEA CULPA - its rather lax of me to have ommitted :

in 1979 ussia was also the largest country on the globe - but wanted moore [ afghanistan ]

happi now ???

From the article linked by the OP: "Soft power is the ability to shape the preferences of others through appeal and attraction". A defining feature of soft power is that it is non-coercive; the currency of soft power is culture, political values, and foreign policies. Recently, the term has also been used in changing and influencing social and public opinion through relatively less transparent channels and lobbying through powerful political and non-political organizations. In 2012, Nye explained that with soft power, “the best propaganda is not propaganda”, further explaining that during the Information Age, “credibility is the scarcest resource”.

So the power not only comes from non-transparency, but also from being "nice". For lack of a better term.

In this day and age, more credence needs to be given to this type of power because the internet isn't going away. It is the vehicle that drives soft power. It is also going to remain more advanced than our understanding of it. If you don't believe me, go back and watch again as Washington leaders threw questions at Zuckerburg. And these are the people who supposedly lead Americans.

Soft power, more and more, is going to be the reason why leaders of countries to do whatever they do. Commerce, finance, military and all other operations that get and keep a country powerful are all going to be influenced by soft power in the years to come.

So think tanks can put Russia on those lists wherever they choose. Call me conspiracy theorist all you want, but as long as Ed Snowden stays in Russia (His asylum has been extended to 2020 with the option of citizenship sometime this year) Russia will have a lot of soft power.

As long as they play nice.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: markovian

From a military perspective, China has no projection whatsoever. While they have a large army they really don't have the capabilities to move it much beyond their borders.

The same goes for Russia. They have one aircraft carrier and it's constantly breaking down.

that dosent exactly explane the rest of the list ... how is france ranked higher than china could france beat china without nato ... if china invaded india could france help ... see what i mean france could do nothing but watch the red dragon yet there stronger

a reply to: markovian

Whether or not France could invade China on their own, they still have the capability to wage war on a global scale. China simply doesn't.

Just look at the current situation. For all intents and purposes France is waging war a continent away. China can't do that.

Then you can also factor in the other factors that contribute to this ranking. For example, France has a larger cultural impact on the world than China. While China has managed to become on of the most influential markets when it comes to movies, France has a much larger reach on pretty much every other cultural factor from fashion to literature to music to... etc.

Very surprised to see the UK at number 2, I imagine we will be much further down the list in 10 years time.

a reply to: Xcalibur254
if we are includeing other factores your going to tell me the worlds largest producer of goods who exports a massive amount of frances goods ...

also where exactly is france projecting un aided ... a list is pointless if u need others on the list to help u

www.defense.gov...

caz over half that artical is how much suport they have ... if thats the case isent this list really nato and the rest of u

They have enough nukes to destroy a lot of cities in the world. I wouldn't say they are just a regional power.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Seems to me if they keep wanting more they should embrace capitalism as it certainly follows the trend.

Edit: And i suppose they have done so to a certain degree.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: markovian

From a military perspective, China has no projection whatsoever. While they have a large army they really don't have the capabilities to move it much beyond their borders.

The same goes for Russia. They have one aircraft carrier and it's constantly breaking down.

As Putin stated recently, Russia certainly doesn't need any more land. It is the biggest country on Planet Earth by a man mile. It has no need for power projection to steal the resources of foreign nations, it has enough resources of it own.

On top of that, Russia deliberately keeps its population low at 140 million to ensure a huge natural resources per capita, making it one of the most politically stable countries in the world.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: markovian

Whether or not France could invade China on their own, they still have the capability to wage war on a global scale. China simply doesn't.

Just look at the current situation. For all intents and purposes France is waging war a continent away. China can't do that.

Then you can also factor in the other factors that contribute to this ranking. For example, France has a larger cultural impact on the world than China. While China has managed to become on of the most influential markets when it comes to movies, France has a much larger reach on pretty much every other cultural factor from fashion to literature to music to... etc.

China has a far more powerful navy than France. China has 052D class destroyers. France don't have ships that big.

en.wikipedia.org...

Not to mention their new 055 destroyers which are bigger than any American destroyer except Zumwalt.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

No to be a super power you have to be able to put assets anywhere in the world. Be able to support them and do it within days. Currently the only one close to the US in being able to do this is the UK. And that's because no one pays attention to haw many military basses the UK has throughout the globe. Very few spots on the globe cannot be reached by British air force. They also have the logistical support because of these basses to maintain troops moved into an area. Russia if they can't use trains to ship supplies there troops will starve.

Russia’s reach has always been the extent of rail supplies. Syria has all ready taxed the Russians ability to supply an external conflict. Syria is under sanctions so Russia is not supposed to use comercial tankers to provide things like jet fuel. However Russia has no choice since there military can't handle moving supplies.

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

No to be a super power you have to be able to put assets anywhere in the world. Be able to support them and do it within days. Currently the only one close to the US in being able to do this is the UK. And that's because no one pays attention to haw many military basses the UK has throughout the globe. Very few spots on the globe cannot be reached by British air force. They also have the logistical support because of these basses to maintain troops moved into an area. Russia if they can't use trains to ship supplies there troops will starve.

Russia’s reach has always been the extent of rail supplies. Syria has all ready taxed the Russians ability to supply an external conflict. Syria is under sanctions so Russia is not supposed to use comercial tankers to provide things like jet fuel. However Russia has no choice since there military can't handle moving supplies.

Say it with me folks: F-O-R-C-E P-R-O-J-E-C-T-I-O-N
China has over half a billion people fit for military service, more than the entire population of the US, and about 5,000,000 currently active and reserve, but it means absolutely jack if you cant get them to where the fight is.

a reply to: dragonridr

Yeah it's true there are a lot of bit of Empire the Brits kept back and these have proved useful bombing Argies, Arabs etc. Cyprus seems in hindsight well worth keeping, right in the hot spot of global football games at present.

a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

To be fair on China, the vast majority of the People's Liberation Army is used for internal repression, e.g. tanks against protesters at Tiananmen Square.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: dragonridr

Yeah it's true there are a lot of bit of Empire the Brits kept back and these have proved useful bombing Argies, Arabs etc. Cyprus seems in hindsight well worth keeping, right in the hot spot of global football games at present.

Even i was shocked how many bases that the Brits maintain throughout the world. This is why they are a global power while russias aircraft carrier breaks down just trying to get to Syria.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: dragonridr

Looking at it logically it looks like the British establishment knew they were in no position to maintain an Empire with boots on the ground, instead they maintained control through economic ties while at the same time keeping certain small tit bit type dependencies scattered all over Planet Earth to keep give them power projection. Should be noted France did exactly the same, maintaining a similar global reach to this day through their overseas Departments. Indeed france seems more entrenched in their former colonies than even Britain, they've got loads of bases in their former empire to keep a form of control over 'independent' states.

originally posted by: rickymouse
They have enough nukes to destroy a lot of cities in the world. I wouldn't say they are just a regional power.

Nukes don't really equate to power though, and as Churchill said: above a certain mega tonnage you're only bouncing rubble.

The UK has the Commonwealth which affords it a lot of power and also has Canada and Australia. When we talk about Canada and Australia we aren't just talking about a usual alliance but the fact that the citizens are related, literally cousins and uncles. Most of us in the UK have at least one relative in those countries.

But the real test of military power is the logistics, if you can't deploy your troops in numbers and keep them supplied then you're done for, that's where countries like China and Russia fall.

I would be interested in reading the Chinese equivalent of this report if anyone has a link.